iamshack

QUOTE (GreenSox @ Jul 28, 2015 -> 06:18 AM) Except the Sox could do it with a different team. On the other hand, by fortifying toronto, that helps them beat the Twins, Orioles and Rays. I guess the Sox may get a bat...if so, I hope it's for Shark and not for the usual KW price. Right, but Toronto has a LOT of bats...and if they are going to get their pitcher either way, well...

BTW, Bucket's info lends some credence to the initial tweet from Crasnick last week after the Kazmir trade that we were all up in arms about in re: the Sox FO not being prepared to make a decision.

At this point, I'm not moving Shark unless I get a solid return. Looking up at the standings, with our staff, I don't know how you bow out of this race. Now if you can move Shark to Toronto for a bat, that could be interesting. But you do so realizing you are fortifying one of your main competitors down the stretch. Question is, if they are going to move on an SP anyways, it may be wise to improve your own chances in the process. I dunno...I think I'd prefer to go with this staff and a lesser hitting club than trying to tinker with the staff to get a bat.

QUOTE (Bigsoxhurt35 @ Jul 27, 2015 -> 08:57 PM) Bats are at a premium now so it will be tough. I don't know. I'm not guessing that teams are lining up to take some of the Rockies hitters and their salaries. Bmags was right on. A few years ago, Cargo/Tulo were primetime players...now, you're looking at being on the wrong end of some of these contracts. I'd take the gamble with Cargo. Not so much with Tulowitzki.

I've got no interest in moving Q. I don't even want to move Shark. We should be able to get a bat if we take on some money in the short term without moving too much of the farm. Given what we've seen from Sanchez and Saladino, Micah is looking like the odd man out to me. My guess is something like MJ and Spencer Adams are the guys they are willing to move.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jul 27, 2015 -> 08:25 PM) Actually, I should merely ask why Tyler Flowers is calling 10 consecutive cutters against DeAza when a single well-executed knuckle curve will wipe him out. http://espn.go.com/mlb/stats/pitching/_/sort/blownSaves He's still tied for the major league lead in blown saves. That doesn't mean we're better off with Addison Reed, but he hasn't been the same pitcher he was the first two months of the season, either. My personal belief is he's getting more work in Chicago because there's no Betances/Miller to protect him, and that he's losing some of the crispness and velocity from his cutter. And, for whatever reason, he's become more reluctant to throw knuckle curves (blocking pitches isn't one of Tyler's strengths). At $12-13 million, you're paying a closer elite money...you expect elite results. I counted 9 relievers just on that first page with higher WAR numbers. Both righties and lefties were hitting under .200 against him coming into tonight...he's given up some very big hits - there is no disputing that - but he's been very, very good.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jul 27, 2015 -> 07:14 PM) If this bullpen is actually nails, this is the week to prove it. A lot of bullpens are nails in this run-scoring environment. I find ours to be fairly middling.

QUOTE (Baron @ Jul 27, 2015 -> 07:12 PM) Yeah he's hitting well right now. I think someone posted a little while ago though that he was hitting .233 outside of Coors He wasn't exactly lighting it up anywhere until the last 2-3 weeks...there was some talk about this before...you can't attribute all of that to Coors. Part of it is just home field, regardless of which particular one.

QUOTE (Baron @ Jul 27, 2015 -> 07:07 PM) Isnt he not hitting well outside Coors? He's on one of his tears right now...I think he's hitting everywhere.

Wow. I saw someone mention this a bit ago...and I agree...go get Cargo.

QUOTE (Baron @ Jul 27, 2015 -> 06:05 PM) But Dan Hayes told me he's good with the pitchers so the offensive part gets canceled out. What a load of s***. My goodness. You are going to give yourself high blood pressure.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jul 27, 2015 -> 02:05 PM) Oh, that was the same game. That was the height of Paulie's brutal stretch. I feel like Alomar/Everett trades happened around then as well. Oh man, that summer he was so bad. He was as shocked as anyone when he hit that.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jul 27, 2015 -> 11:42 AM) I've heard the reasoning behind Texas's interest, still so weird to me. What is their reasoning?

QUOTE (Bigsoxhurt35 @ Jul 26, 2015 -> 06:30 PM) It was just another crazy prediction. I'm not pounding the table for it but if we decide against selling or even want to move Shark and get a bat, then CarGo would be an interesting piece. For the fact that he's been hurt and is having a decent year this year and has played in 88 games. He's been somewhat healthy this year. Could be a very intriguing and KW does have a history of outside the box moves. Plus I love CarGo. He's my favorite player not on the Sox. I'm biased lol. Contract details: '16 he makes 17 million and in '17 he makes 20 million. Not sure what he's owed the rest of his 16 million this year. Obviously Colorado would be sending some money back in the deal. With bats at a premium, this is the sort of deal you're going to have to make if you want one. I don't know that Colorado would be sending back much money, to be honest.

QUOTE (Baron @ Jul 26, 2015 -> 04:58 PM) I hope we trade him before his next start on Tuesday if we do. Plus it looks like Price is off the market. I can't see us trading him that quickly after the way the Cleveland series went. I suppose they might pull the trigger if we lose tomorrow night, but I'm doubtful of that.

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Jul 26, 2015 -> 03:06 PM) Soto is a good signing. Putnam is a good signing. Those are shrewd moves. Gillaspie was good for a bit too. You can't criticize for Beckahm/Keppinger/Bonifacio and not credit for Soto and Putnam on minor league deals. Most of those guys were cheap flyers too. I have no idea whose idea it was to sign LaRoche, Melky, and Robertson but those all seemed like decent/good moves at the time as well. I'm still not disappointed in the Melky or Robertson moves. To be honest, I haven't been too disappointed with Melky at all this year, despite the numbers. For most of the year, he's continued to have profession at bats, which is something we sorely lack. Robertson, despite some extremely untimely big hits given up, has been pretty much all that one could ask for. Not quite sure why some are wanting to give up on him already. The LaRoche move is the one I didn't like.

QUOTE (Jake @ Jul 26, 2015 -> 02:48 PM) Don't forget that the owner plays a role in the direction the FO takes. Kenny has said there were multiple times in the past 10 years that he has proposed tearing things down and was convinced/ordered by Reinsdorf to instead focus on short-term win-loss scenarios. I think the team's focus now is once again to avoid moves that are likely to have an adverse effect on our record that would extend into next season, but at the same time I think they want to avoid moves that will hurt us in the long term too. "Win more now and in the future" is an easier philosophy to talk about than to achieve of course, but the main way you would achieve this is to do a lot of standing pat when it comes to trades. Most likely because nearly every organization in baseball is attempting to pull off this maneuver.

QUOTE (Baron @ Jul 26, 2015 -> 02:35 PM) Last I looked he's not the general manager. But maybe he should be. Well he's actually in a position above the General Manager. Unless you meant that GM's generally don't survive, but instead are promoted, this sort of flies in the face of your point, at least from the standpoint of the White Sox organization.

QUOTE (Jake @ Jul 26, 2015 -> 02:31 PM) There's just no point to a grand sell-off. Trading Samardzija, who is about to be a FA anyway, makes some sense. But otherwise the team is young, your best players are under team control for a long time, and you just want to see some of the young guys improve. There's no rebuild to do, you're rebuilding already. I agree, except for the fact that you have to start looking at moving some of your assets from your position of strength for assets that help build up your position of weakness. Otherwise, you may not "rebuild" in time to capitalize on those players you have under team control.

QUOTE (Baron @ Jul 26, 2015 -> 02:29 PM) What about him? He's certainly survived much of what you said GM's don't survive.

QUOTE (Baron @ Jul 26, 2015 -> 02:25 PM) Right and at the end of that if results arent shown they are going to be in big trouble. You cant talk about high expectations,fail and then go oh well. Let's tear it down and you'll have to wait some more. General Managers dont survive that. Kenny?

QUOTE (Baron @ Jul 26, 2015 -> 02:21 PM) Hahn has 2 years. Maybe 1 year depending on how things go. If the plan is the 3 year window as has been repeated then the future is really soon. Plus we would of had to sell low on a majority of the guys we've been talking about the past few months. That's not patience. That's cut bait and save face. Well I won't disagree with you as to the bolded. If it wasn't for Jeff's resurgence over the past two months, we would have almost nothing to sell (unless you want to move guys from the core), outside of a few pen arms, which, are really not that much in demand right now in this current run-scoring environment. Bats, which we don't have, are what is much more in demand.

QUOTE (Baron @ Jul 26, 2015 -> 02:21 PM) Hahn has 2 years. Maybe 1 year depending on how things go. If the plan is the 3 year window as has been repeated then the future is really soon. I don't think the 3-year window is Hahn's window. The 3-year window is their chosen period of time for which they evaluate a given roster.

QUOTE (Baron @ Jul 26, 2015 -> 02:15 PM) How does selling 3 weeks ago sound like patience? Sounds like Kenny's supposed plan is more patient that what your saying Hahn wanted. In reality Kenny's is working out much better right now. Long term, it is more patient. Rick wants to cut bait on this team and keep building towards the future. Kenny probably wants to add to this roster, sacrificing a bit of the future.

QUOTE (raBBit @ Jul 26, 2015 -> 02:06 PM) Take it with a grain of salt then but I have long been beating the "KW-Hahn tension is overblown and Hahn wouldn't accept a job under him if he didn't think it could work" drum. I was wrong and I recant that sentiment. All intel I've been getting says not that they are feuding, but they definitely have different ideas towards operations. Good info, Brian. I don't think that should be a surprise to anyone. We've seen Kenny's approach, which is always focus on improving the big league club in the immediate term. Now we've seen a bit of Hahn's approach, which is essentially develop from the ground up a bit more, be more patient, stay with the process. Does it surprise anyone that these two approaches are a bit at odds with one another?